WCS responds to those opposed to storage sites

Company vice president wants to clarify nature of the nuclear waste, risks involved

FILE - In this Oct. 14, 2009, photo provided by Waste Control Specialists, canisters filled with uranium byproduct waste are placed into a burial pit at at Waste Control Specialists near Andrews, Texas. People living nearest to the site would be barred from challenging license amendments sought by the company operating the facility under a Senate bill that could be voted on as early as Wednesday, April 17, 2013. The bill also encourages compact members Texas and Vermont to send their low-level waste elsewhere and seeks to prohibit public hearings or comment on some amendments to the company's license. (AP Photo/Waste Control Specialists, File)

FILE - In this Oct. 14, 2009, photo provided by Waste Control Specialists, canisters filled with uranium byproduct waste are placed into a burial pit at at Waste Control Specialists near Andrews, Texas. People

FILE - In this Oct. 14, 2009, photo provided by Waste Control Specialists, canisters filled with uranium byproduct waste are placed into a burial pit at at Waste Control Specialists near Andrews, Texas. People living nearest to the site would be barred from challenging license amendments sought by the company operating the facility under a Senate bill that could be voted on as early as Wednesday, April 17, 2013. The bill also encourages compact members Texas and Vermont to send their low-level waste elsewhere and seeks to prohibit public hearings or comment on some amendments to the company's license. (AP Photo/Waste Control Specialists, File)

FILE - In this Oct. 14, 2009, photo provided by Waste Control Specialists, canisters filled with uranium byproduct waste are placed into a burial pit at at Waste Control Specialists near Andrews, Texas. People

Orano-Waste Control Specialists is offering a defense of its application to serve as an interim storage location for high level nuclear power plant waste at its facility in Andrews County.

The company was joined in submitting applications by Holtec International, which also wants to construct an interim storage site at its facility in Lea and Eddy counties, New Mexico.

The applications have drawn concerns about the safety of the waste, from the durability of the casks used to transport the waste to the risks to local communities as that waste travels by train to the storage facilities.

COMING SOON:

The response by Elicia Sanchez, senior vice president at Waste Control Specialists, will appear in its entirety in Sunday's edition.

Those behind the “Protect the Basin” movement raising concerns about the applications say they want to make sure everyone knows just what would happen and what the risks could be. They also wonder just how “interim” those storage sites could be, noting it could be anywhere from 40 to 100 years. Opponents acknowledge the risks are small but said that the consequences would be significant.

Elicia Sanchez, senior vice president at WCS, also wants a straightforward conversation on the topic, saying clarity and understanding of the nature of the material and the risks involved must be promoted.

In the response, she addresses those concerns, first by detailing just exactly what the nuclear fuel is, how it is created and how it is packaged once it is spent and removed from the nuclear reactor. She also describes how that spent fuel is handled after its removal, the efforts to ensure the fuel doesn’t degrade over time and the various materials used in building the transport casks once the decision has been made to move the fuel to a storage site. Sanchez defends the science, experience handling the spent nuclear fuel and the regulatory processes governing its movement.

Of the material destined for an interim storage location, she says it is very stable and there can be no comparison to nuclear weapons, the Chernobyl plant in Russia that suffered a catastrophic accident in 1986, or even the materials stored at the Waste Isolation Pilot Project at Carlsbad, New Mexico.

Those opposed to the applications have pointed out that, should the sites be constructed, trainloads of waste would be coming through Midland-Odessa weekly for at least the next 24 years. They cite recent train wrecks and say an accident could impact a 50-mile radius of the site. They worry a significant accident could negatively impact the Permian Basin’s oil and gas industry.

Sanchez also addresses those concerns with a discussion of rail safety, complete with references to incidents in Europe involving casks that were knocked off the rails. She cites research and testing that shows there is no way the used nuclear fuel could spread and cause harm, even if both the transport cask and the canister containing the fuel were breached.

She refutes opponents’ contention that the plans are poorly thought out, saying everything about transporting the nuclear fuel is carefully planned, considered and implemented, particularly the routes the trains would take to reach Andrews and southeastern New Mexico.

She also stresses she is a stakeholder in the discussion, being a long-time member of the community and a parent. She writes she has full confidence transporting and storing high level nuclear waste in the region will not threaten local communities, water supplies or the Permian Basin’s oil and gas industry.